School Refuses AAC Evaluation: What to Do Next

Why Schools Refuse — and Why They Usually Cannot

When a school district refuses to evaluate a child for augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), the refusal typically falls into one of three categories: the child "is not ready," the child "already talks," or the district "does not have the expertise." Those statements alone do not answer whether assistive technology could meet the child's individual communication needs.

IDEA requires the IEP team to consider assistive technology for every child with an IEP (34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)(v)). AAC devices are assistive technology. If a child has complex communication needs and the team has not considered whether assistive technology, including AAC, is needed, it has skipped a federally mandated consideration.

Your Immediate Next Steps

Demand Prior Written Notice

When a school verbally refuses an AAC evaluation, request Prior Written Notice (PWN) in writing. Under 34 CFR 300.503, the school must document what they are refusing, the data supporting the refusal, what alternatives they considered, and why they rejected those alternatives. Many districts will reconsider a refusal rather than put their reasoning on paper, because the reasoning often does not hold up.

Request an IEE for AAC

If the school conducted an evaluation that did not include AAC assessment — or that concluded AAC was unnecessary based on insufficient evidence — you have the right to request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) at public expense under 34 CFR 300.502. Specify that you want the IEE conducted by an SLP with AAC specialization or a certified assistive technology professional.

File a State Complaint

If the school refuses to evaluate despite a written request and you believe the refusal violates IDEA, you can file a state complaint with your state education agency. The agency must investigate and issue a written decision within 60 days, subject to the limited extensions allowed under IDEA. This option is free and does not require a lawyer.

AAC Goals That Belong in the IEP

Once an AAC system is in place, the IEP needs goals that address real communication — not just device operation. Here are examples:

Requesting. Using the AAC device, the student will independently request desired items, activities, or help across 3 school settings in 8 of 10 opportunities over 4 consecutive weeks.

Commenting. During shared classroom activities, the student will use the AAC device to spontaneously comment on what is happening (not just respond to prompts) at least 3 times per 15-minute observation, across 4 sessions.

Core vocabulary expansion. The student will use a minimum of 50 different core vocabulary words on the AAC device across a school week, as measured by device data logs, increasing from the current baseline of 25 words.

Multi-word combinations. The student will combine 2 or more words on the AAC device to communicate a complete message (e.g., "want more," "go outside," "help please") in 70 percent of communication attempts across 3 sessions.

Communication repair. When a message is not understood by the listener, the student will use a repair strategy on the AAC device (navigate to a different page, try an alternative word, or add context) instead of abandoning the communication attempt, in 4 of 5 breakdowns.

Goals Should Specify Access

Include a statement in the IEP that the AAC device is available to the student at all times during the school day — during instruction, transitions, lunch, recess, and specials. A device locked in a cabinet between therapy sessions is not functional AAC support.

Also include staff training under "supports for school personnel." Classroom teachers, aides, and specials instructors need to know how to model AAC use, respond when the child communicates via device, and troubleshoot basic issues. Without training, even the best device sits unused.

The Myth That AAC Prevents Speech

Parents hear this fear from school staff, family members, and occasionally even clinicians who are not current on the research. The evidence is overwhelmingly clear: AAC does not inhibit natural speech development. Systematic reviews by Millar, Light, and Schlosser (2006) and Schlosser and Wendt (2008) found that AAC introduction either had no effect on speech production or actually increased spoken language output.

The logic is straightforward. A child who cannot communicate experiences constant frustration, which leads to withdrawal and behavioral challenges. AAC gives them a reliable way to participate, which reduces frustration and increases social engagement — the very conditions that support speech development. Denying AAC "to encourage talking" is like denying a wheelchair to encourage walking.

If a school team cites this concern as a reason to delay AAC, reference ASHA's position statement on AAC, which explicitly states that AAC supports — rather than hinders — natural speech development. The evidence does not support withholding AAC as a motivational strategy.

The Speech-Language & Apraxia IEP Toolkit includes a formal AAC evaluation request letter, a pushback script for each common refusal argument, and AAC-specific IEP goal templates — all grounded in IDEA regulations and current clinical evidence.